Talk:Zelgiuce of Purgatory
God, this is actually a FMA character? I thought it was some lame Bleach or Naruto character. These video game character designs really don't do much for the FMA style, that's for sure. Tommy-Vercetti 13:06, September 19, 2011 (UTC) :Read the article about the game itself... Your eyes will bleed. When I first read it, I stared at it in disbelief, and I still can't believe it is part of FMA universe (though thankfully it's not canon). --kiadony --talk to me-- 13:25, September 19, 2011 (UTC) They will spat out anything to keep milking a sucessful franchise. The bigger question, at least to me, is, what kind of FMA fan would even WANT to buy something like that?Tommy-Vercetti 14:02, September 19, 2011 (UTC) :Well, I'd say that is pretty 2003 series-ish, except being even more absurd. So maybe fans of the 2003 series? To me, the main problem is that both 2003 series and these video games killed FMA's uniqueness and turned it into a standard fantasy story where anything can happen ("Resurrection? No problem! Magic? Pff, of course! Zombies? Creepy diseases? Whatever you want!"), while Arakawa had set pretty well-defined standards on what is possible and what isn't in the manga. --kiadony --talk to me-- 14:22, September 19, 2011 (UTC) :Probably the kind of FMA fan who likes Naruto and Bleach and all those other overdone fantasy plots. And even if the first series is sub-par, it's preferable to something that has more filler episodes than episodes based on the manga (a category which I'm sure Naruto, Bleach, etcetera fit into). I suppose the whole second half of the first series could be called "filler," but it's a whole lot better than that all being in one series. Just imagine if that thing had ran from 2003-2010. Scary. And it's not that Naruto and Bleach have anything wrong with them (I know you're a fan of at least Naruto, Kiadony), they just seem to fit into the stereotypical filler-filled anything can happen fantasy storylines. Fullmetal Fan 17:14, September 19, 2011 (UTC) The last thing I think about when I say fantasy is either Naruto or Bleach. I think of overly cliched shonen-style formula that has been milked where even the fans hate them now. Even the most rabid Naruto fans hate the manga now, and that's suuuuuch a good sign, right? There's nothing wrong with shonen series, some have been very well done, and one of them is my favorite anime of all time: Yu Yu Hakusho. And I also thought the manga of Rurouni Kenshin was also excellent. Fantasy is literally, you know, fantasy. My all time favorite manga series is Berserk, and that's fantasy; well, dark fantasy, but no one has 'powers' nor it is a 'fighting series'. The latter is a staple of most shonen series, which I believe more accurately describes both Naruto and Bleach. As for the original FMA, I think it really did try to maintain its own principles, but the writing was just so bad, they got desperate, so they just started making up crap and breaking the rules. Like, there was never a 'parallel world' idea even hinted at, but they thought it would be 'cool' as a climax, so bam, there we go. That's why I dislike it so much; it just made crap up because they didn't know where they were headed it seemed. Which, I reiterate this fact clearly, that's a good reason to wait awhile before adapting a manga into anime... but they never learn.Tommy-Vercetti 17:31, September 19, 2011 (UTC) :True, manga should not be adapted unless it's complete or nearly complete. I mean, what's going on with Ao no Exorcist anime? I was surprised to learn that they are making the anime for an ongoing manga that is only, like, 27 (?) chapters long. And of course, from what I've heard, the anime is mostly filler. My favourite manga would be Deadman Wonderland, and its anime adaptation is pretty good, except it stopped after airing one season. :Also, fantasy can be different, for example, fairytale fantasy vs. science fantasy (which is how I like to define FMA). --kiadony --talk to me-- 17:52, September 19, 2011 (UTC) I always thought of the shonen formula though as more supernatural. Most of the time they seem to be ordinary teenagers who meet someone, do something, something big happens that opens up this supernatural realm of powers, fighting, etc, like that. Kenshin is a strange shonen example though. There are obvious fantasy elements for entertainment reasons, but yet for the most part, it still tries to be historically accurate, and no one ever has any kind of 'powers' beyond just being exceptional swordsmen. But yeah, fantasy is a broad term. And Berserk on the contrary is a dark fantasy epic set in medieval Denmark, and sets itself up as both medieval storytelling, mixed in with demonics and other kind of fantasy elements like fairies, and it gets far more extreme as it progresses. That's a little more in line of what I think of when it comes to fantasy, but anything that's beyond reality is also technically fantasy, which I guess pretty much puts 95% of all anime in that category. Tommy-Vercetti 18:04, September 19, 2011 (UTC) :I prefer to distinguish between fantasy and science fiction though. I know that many sci-fi manga often has fantasy elements, but I like it more when it's purely sci-fi. --kiadony --talk to me-- 18:10, September 19, 2011 (UTC) :Well, I suppose any genre could be considered a "broad term." I consider fantasy to be stories that have magic and supernatural things in them, which most shonen storylines (including FMA) have. But look at the vast diversity of say, science fiction. Not all science fiction is about spaceships and aliens, just like not all fantasy is about wizards and dwarfs. FMA is kind of a science fiction/fantasy mix. It has science principals in it (chemistry, biology, etcetera), but also "magic" that isn't based on science as we know it (alchemy that actually works). As for science fiction manga having fantasy elements, I think it's because they're often popular with the same people. Go to a bookstore and the fantasy and science fiction sections are usually mixed together. Fullmetal Fan 18:17, September 19, 2011 (UTC) ::Yeah, this is why I call FMA "science fantasy" (well actually it's from Wikipedia), and this is why I consider it unique, and this is why I disapprove of 2003 anime and games ruining this feel by adding more typical fantasy stuff. Of course science fiction is broadly defined, too, and I mostly like dystopian/post-apocalyptic future sci-fi rather than typical aliens-and-spaceships stories. And I actually like it how manga authors aren't bound by Western definitions of fantasy and science fiction, often mixing them up quite gracefully, or positively absurdly (Evangelion broke my brain though), while you don't really see any (serious) Hollywood movies where, say, dragons and robots coexist as if it's completely normal (unless I missed something). --kiadony --talk to me-- 18:38, September 19, 2011 (UTC) I agree. You can lump multiple genres together. Since Alchemy isn't a plausible concept, that makes FMA Science Fantasy, because it does given logical explanations and reasoning, not just 'it just does', but it's not a feasible real world concept. But if you take the nerd favorite Star Trek for example, not only is it plausible, but it's explained in minute detail on how and why everything works, which would be Science Fiction. Robots, demons, elves, however they're used, more than the phsyical concepts themselves is usually how I judge a genre moreso than others. A great example is both Star Wars and Star Trek both have space ships, yet one is still Science Fantasy and one is Science Fiction based solely on how the ships are used. Nothing technological in Star Wars is ever explained and the ships are merely storytelling elements, used as transport, it's not important how they work, and I already mentioned Trek, but they're used differently, despite having the same concepts.Tommy-Vercetti 18:52, September 19, 2011 (UTC) :Heh, don't get me started on Star Wars-verse. Not that I dislike it, I'm pretty neutral towards it, but many parts of it seem to be pretty random (I'm talking about Expanded Universe here). Oh course, it has everything, including space elves, and a randomly created demon race. It's still more sci-fi since these races are still called "alien" and the Force is due to midi-chlorians and not magic. I'd define Star Wars as space soap opera with writers who are too focused on the story to write scientific explanations (again, I'm not hating). :On the other hand, they do give some insight on how thing work, for example, lightsabers function thanks to some crystals, and then you have things like this. It's probably that sometimes, a writer who is more interested in technology is in charge, and they put info like this in artbooks/guidebooks and suchlike, while Lucas himself pays little attention to technology. :Also, Fullmetal Fan, I'm pretty sure that, at least in large bookstores in my city, science fiction books are separate from fantasy books. Actually, they are often divided into Russian science fiction, foreign science fiction, Russian fantasy, foreign fantasy and Stephen King. Oh well, I might have made the last one up. Of course, there might be a cultural difference in the definitions of genres, or something. --kiadony --talk to me-- 07:30, September 20, 2011 (UTC) ::Well, I live in a city with just under 100k people, so there are no really big book stores here, but all of them seem to put science fiction and fantasy together, as do the libraries. Maybe some larger stores don't, but I have been to a few larger stores and it seems to be the same story. Maybe it's a Canada thing :). Fullmetal Fan 07:40, September 20, 2011 (UTC) I'm no Star Was fanboy by any means, but you really shouldn't include prequel garbage into analyzing the SW universe. Worst movies ever made, they are epidomy of awful screenwriting, and no detail about them should ever be used in any kind of debate regarding how universes work. Just saying, they were quite literally the worst movies I have ever seen in my entire life.Tommy-Vercetti 13:03, September 20, 2011 (UTC) :I didn't bring up the movies, I was talking about EU (it doesn't include movies) >.> I know that die-hard fans only consider the original trilogy canon, but I'm not a fan at all, so I don't care. I've seen worse movies than these, too. --kiadony --talk to me-- 14:45, September 20, 2011 (UTC) Yeah, but my exact point was, I was reffering back to the original movies for my example, and the fact you brought up all those laughably absurd "science fiction" elements from the prequels was a void argument. Being a writer myself, I'm incredibly big on continuity and a flowing story, and despite all of Lucas' godawful changes, if you watch episode 3, then the original movie, it does not match up even a little bit. It's just laughable writing, it's almost mindblowing in how complex the awfulness is. Quite frankly, it's so obvious that the prequels and the original movies do not meld together even in the slightest, so bringing up the point "They gave a technical reasoning to the workings of this..." is void when talking about the originals. The originals were plain and cut Science Fantasy and that was my example when compared with Trek. Not the entire nerdome of Star Wars and every side story that nerds latch onto. So I was just explaining that the entire point of my argument was lost, which was merely just stating examples of "Science Fiction" vs "Science Fantasy".Tommy-Vercetti 15:00, September 20, 2011 (UTC) :Yes, I agree. Those elves and demons baffle me, I just forgot to mention that. But yeah, if you only take the original trilogy into consideration, it sure is science fantasy, and, now that I think of it, can kinda be compared to FMA manga in terms of having been ruined by deviations from the original canon. The original SW were ruined (well for hardcore fans anyway) by half-a$$ed scientific explanations trying to make it more sci-fi (apparently fans were furious about the midi-chlorian concept) and plot holes, while FMA suffered from additions of cliched stuff, plot holes and angst, lots and lots of angst. It's just that it's been a really long while since I last saw any of the SW movies, to the point of not being quite able to tell which of them is about what >.> And by the way, I used to be a writer, too. --kiadony --talk to me-- 15:37, September 20, 2011 (UTC) Back on topic with page I've been wondering something the more I look at this. Obviously these video game characters are like three worlds apart from any anime, let alone the manga series. So regarding categories, do you think for these guys we could be a little more specific, like say "Video game characters"? I mean, whenever I look at this guy and see "Characters", exactly the same as everyone else, something just sits wrong with me. Tommy-Vercetti 18:46, September 20, 2011 (UTC) :I wouldn't add specific categories, it might turn into horror like this (scroll down a bit to see the horror) but we can instead add a Game only section to the Characters page, for example. --kiadony --talk to me-- 19:02, September 20, 2011 (UTC) Also, we might add the Video Games category to all video game characters so something puts them apart from the rest of the characters. But we seriously should keep amount of categories to minimum so it's all neat. --kiadony --talk to me-- 19:13, September 20, 2011 (UTC)